A framework for organizing and selecting quantitative approaches for benefit-harm assessment

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 12, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Puhan, Milo A ^a   Singh, Sonal ^b   Weiss, Carlos O ^c   Varadhan, Ravi ^b   Boyd, Cynthia M ^b  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; STANDARD; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

COMPUTER GRAPHICS; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK ASSESSMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84869144711     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-173     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular disease, Ann Intern Med 2009 150 6 396 404 19293072
2. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, Redmond CK, Kavanah M, Cronin WM, Vogel V, Robidoux A, Dimitrov N, Atkins J, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998 90 18 1371 1388 10.1093/jnci/90.18. 1371 9747868 (Pubitemid 28439961)
3. Weighing the risks and benefits of tamoxifen treatment for preventing breast cancer. Gail MH, Costantino JP, Bryant J, Croyle R, Freedman L, Helzlsouer K, Vogel V, J Natl Cancer Inst 1999 91 21 1829 1846 10.1093/jnci/91.21.1829 10547390
4. Multi-criteria clinical decision support: A primer on the use of multiple criteria decision making methods to promote evidence-based, patient-centered healthcare. Dolan JG, Patient 2010 3 4 229 248 10.2165/11539470-000000000-00000 21394218
5. A review of quantitative risk-benefit methodologies for assessing drug safety and efficacy-report of the ISPOR risk-benefit management working group. Guo JJ, Pandey S, Doyle J, Bian B, Lis Y, Raisch DW, Value Health 2010 13 5 657 666 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00725.x 20412543
6. Benefit-risk analysis: a proposal using quantitative methods. Holden WL, Juhaeri J, Dai W, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003 12 7 611 616 10.1002/pds.887 14558185 (Pubitemid 37220648)
7. Using the incremental net benefit framework for quantitative benefit-risk analysis in regulatory decision-making-a case study of alosetron in irritable bowel syndrome. Lynd LD, Najafzadeh M, Colley L, Byrne MF, Willan AR, Sculpher MJ, Johnson FR, Hauber AB, Value Health 2010 13 4 411 417 10.1111/j.1524-4733. 2009.00595.x 19744297
8. Uncertainty in the minimum event risk to justify treatment was evaluated. Walter SD, Sinclair JC, J Clin Epidemiol 2009 62 8 816 824 10.1016/j.jclinepi. 2008.09.017 19216053
9. A Perspective on Characterizing Benefits and Risks Derived From Clinical Trials: Can We Do More? O'Neill RT, Drug Inf J 2008 42 3 235 245 10.1177/009286150804200305 (Pubitemid 351775942)
10. European Medicine Agency, Reflection paper on benefit-risk assessment methods in the context of the evaluation of marketing authorisation applications of medicinal products for human use 2008 Doc. Ref. EMEA/CHMP/15404/2007 http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Regulatory-and-procedural- guideline/2010/01/WC500069634.pdf, last accessed February 16 2012
11. European Medicine Agency, Report of the Committee for Medicinal Products Working Group on Benefit-Risk Assessment Models and Methods 2007 Doc. Ref. EMEA/CHMP/15404/2007 http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/ Regulatory-and-procedural-guideline/2010/01/WC500069668.pdf, last accessed February 16 2012
12. An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. Laupacis A, Sackett DL, Roberts RS, N Engl J Med 1988 318 26 1728 1733 10.1056/NEJM198806303182605 3374545
13. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. Cook RJ, Sackett DL, BMJ 1995 310 6977 452 454 10.1136/bmj.310.6977.452 7873954
14. Evaluation of effectiveness: Q-TWiST. The International Breast Cancer Study Group. Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A, Cole BF, Cancer Treat Rev 1993 19 Suppl A 73 84 7679323
15. A quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) analysis of adjuvant radiation therapy and chemotherapy for resectable rectal cancer. Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A, Cole BF, Wieand HS, Schroeder G, Krook JE, J Natl Cancer Inst 1996 88 15 1039 1045 10.1093/jnci/88.15.1039 8683634 (Pubitemid 26260489)
16. A quantitative approach to benefit-risk assessment of medicines-part 1: the development of a new model using multi-criteria decision analysis. Mussen F, Salek S, Walker S, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2007 16 Suppl 1 2 S15 17546573
17. A quantitative approach to benefit-risk assessment of medicines-part 2: the practical application of a new model. Mussen F, Salek S, Walker S, Phillips L, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2007 16 Suppl 1 16 S41 17546574
18. Antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Singer DE, Albers GW, Dalen JE, Fang MC, Go AS, Halperin JL, Lip GY, Manning WJ, Chest 2008 133 6 Suppl 546S 592S 18574273 (Pubitemid 351892972)
19. Users' guides to the medical literature: XVI. How to use a treatment recommendation. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group and the Cochrane Applicability Methods Working Group. Guyatt GH, Sinclair J, Cook DJ, Glasziou P, JAMA 1999 281 19 1836 1843 10.1001/jama.281.19.1836 10340372 (Pubitemid 29231135)
20. Treatment benefit and the risk of suicidality in multicenter, randomized, controlled trials of sertraline in children and adolescents. March JS, Klee BJ, Kremer CM, J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol 2006 16 1-2 91 102 16553531
21. Optimal management of adults with pharyngitis-a multi-criteria decision analysis. Singh S, Dolan JG, Centor RM, BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2006 6 14 10.1186/1472-6947-6-14 16533386
22. Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. Elwyn G, O'Connor A, Stacey D, Volk R, Edwards A, Coulter A, Thomson R, Barratt A, Barry M, Bernstein S, et al. BMJ 2006 333 7565 417 10.1136/bmj.38926.629329.AE 16908462 (Pubitemid 44320126)
23. A first step to assess harm and benefit in clinical trials in one scale. Boers M, Brooks P, Fries JF, Simon LS, Strand V, Tugwell P, J Clin Epidemiol 2010 63 6 627 632 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.07.002 19800197
24. Assessing a structured, quantitative health outcomes approach to drug risk-benefit analysis. Garrison LP Jr, Towse A, Bresnahan BW, Health Aff (Millwood) 2007 26 3 684 695 10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.684
25. Use of quality-adjusted life year weights with dose-response models for public health decisions: a case study of the risks and benefits of fish consumption. Ponce RA, Bartell SM, Wong EY, LaFlamme D, Carrington C, Lee RC, Patrick DL, Faustman EM, Bolger M, Risk Anal 2000 20 4 529 542 10.1111/0272-4332.204050 11051076 (Pubitemid 34189301)
26. Shared decision-making-transferring research into practice: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Dolan JG, Patient Educ Couns 2008 73 3 418 425 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.032 18760559
27. Benefit-risk analysis: examples using quantitative methods. Holden WL, Juhaeri J, Dai W, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003 12 8 693 697 10.1002/pds.794 14762986 (Pubitemid 38028784)
28. A Bayesian approach to evaluating net clinical benefit allowed for parameter uncertainty. Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, Abrams KR, Lambert PC, Jones DR, J Clin Epidemiol 2005 58 1 26 40 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.03.015 15649668 (Pubitemid 40103532)
29. Advances in risk-benefit evaluation using probabilistic simulation methods: an application to the prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis. Lynd LD, O'Brien BJ, J Clin Epidemiol 2004 57 8 795 803 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.012 15485731 (Pubitemid 39370162)
30. Q-TWiST analysis of lapatinib combined with capecitabine for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Sherrill B, Amonkar MM, Stein S, Walker M, Geyer C, Cameron D, Br J Cancer 2008 99 5 711 715 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604501 18728660
31. Improving interpretation of clinical studies by use of confidence levels, clinical significance curves, and risk-benefit contours. Shakespeare TP, Gebski VJ, Veness MJ, Simes J, Lancet 2001 357 9265 1349 1353 10.1016/S0140-6736(00) 04522-0 11343760 (Pubitemid 32441538)
32. Joint distribution approaches to simultaneously quantifying benefit and risk. Shaffer ML, Watterberg KL, BMC Med Res Methodol 2006 6 48 10.1186/1471-2288-6-48 17038184 (Pubitemid 44689981)
33. Treatment preferences and medication adherence of people with Type 2 diabetes using oral glucose-lowering agents. Hauber AB, Mohamed AF, Johnson FR, Falvey H, Diabet Med 2009 26 4 416 424 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02696.x 19388973
34. Crohn's disease patients' risk-benefit preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy. Johnson FR, Ozdemir S, Mansfield C, Hass S, Miller DW, Siegel CA, Sands BE, Gastroenterology 2007 133 3 769 779 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.04.075 17628557 (Pubitemid 47374126)
35. Are adult patients more tolerant of treatment risks than parents of juvenile patients? Johnson FR, Ozdemir S, Mansfield C, Hass S, Siegel CA, Sands BE, Risk Anal 2009 29 1 121 136 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01135.x 18826414
36. A new proposal for benefit-less-risk analysis in clinical trials. Chuang-Stein C, Control Clin Trials 1994 15 1 30 43 10.1016/0197-2456(94)90026-4 7908619 (Pubitemid 24078603)
37. Number needed to treat (NNT): implication in rheumatology clinical practice. Osiri M, Suarez-Almazor ME, Wells GA, Robinson V, Tugwell P, Ann Rheum Dis 2003 62 4 316 321 10.1136/ard.62.4.316 12634229 (Pubitemid 36363436)
38. Multiple sclerosis patients' benefit-risk preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy. Johnson FR, Van Houtven G, Ozdemir S, Hass S, White J, Francis G, Miller DW, Phillips JT, J Neurol 2009 256 4 554 562 10.1007/s00415-009-0084-2 19444531
39. Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care. Ryan M, McIntosh E, Shackley P, Health Econ 1998 7 4 373 378 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199806)7:4<373::AID-HEC348>3.0.CO;2-J 9683097 (Pubitemid 28339965)
40. Reporting of adverse effects in clinical trials should be improved: lessons from acute postoperative pain. Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore RA, Collins SL, J Pain Symptom Manage 1999 18 6 427 437 10.1016/S0885-3924(99)00093-7 10641469
41. Lynd L, Coombes M, Rishidi A, Sculpher M, Willan A, First steps in developing a risk-benefit analysis framework: a systematic review and critical evaluation of risk-benefit analysis methods York (UK): University of York 2004 http://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/presentations/04.pdf
42. The identification of benefit in medical intervention: an overview and suggestions for process. Stang PE, Pham SV, Kinchen K, Raff SB, Mussen F, Gondek K, Am J Ther 2008 15 5 495 503 10.1097/MJT.0b013e31816b8fff 18806527
43. The minimal important difference of exercise tests in severe COPD. Puhan MA, Chandra D, Mosenifar Z, Ries A, Make B, Hansel NN, Wise RA, Sciurba F, Eur Respir J 2011 37 4 784 790 10.1183/09031936.00063810 20693247
44. The minimal important difference of the hospital anxiety and depression scale in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Puhan MA, Frey M, Buchi S, Schunemann HJ, Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008 6 46 10.1186/1477-7525-6- 46 18597689 (Pubitemid 352034198)